Comment on Youtube remains unprofitable 3 years after Google acquisitionparentComments−_cbsz17yOn the surface, your argument has intuitive merit. However, you don't sue a business unit (Youtube), you sue a company (Google). Google is profitable.−jfoutz17yOn the surface, your argument has intuitive merit. However, youtube isn't a business unit. it's a subsidiary.http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/01/look-ahead-at-google-... http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6153267-7.htmledit: sorry, that was sorta snarky. and things may have changed since the viacom lawsuit. (it was a subsidiary in late 2008)−_cbsz17yTouche! Didn't do my homework on this one.
Comments
On the surface, your argument has intuitive merit. However, you don't sue a business unit (Youtube), you sue a company (Google). Google is profitable.
On the surface, your argument has intuitive merit. However, youtube isn't a business unit. it's a subsidiary.
http://googleblog.blogspot.com/2007/01/look-ahead-at-google-... http://news.cnet.com/8301-10784_3-6153267-7.html
edit: sorry, that was sorta snarky. and things may have changed since the viacom lawsuit. (it was a subsidiary in late 2008)
Touche! Didn't do my homework on this one.